39

Journal of Politics and International Studies Vol. 6, No. 1, January–June 2020, pp.39– 56

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation

Device in the Speeches of a Pakistani Prime Minister

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah

Assistant Professor,

Department of Applied Linguistics,

Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan

Muhammad Ahmad

PhD Candidate, Government College University Faisalabad, Pakistan

Correspondence: ahmad453@yandex.com

ABSTRACT

This study aims to analyze the ideological function of repetition and positive-self vs. negative-

other representation strategy in the political discourse. The data for this study comprises of the

speeches of a former Pakistani Prime Minister, Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, which has been

analyzed in the light of theoretical framework for political discourse analysis (PDA) as well as

discourse historical approach (DHA) focusing on to highlight the change in the Mr. Sharif’s

ideology/stance over the period of time, and describe major reasons behind the said change. As a

result, Mr. Sharif has been observed to change his stance over the period of time to manipulate

his political speeches due to self-centeredness, and to convince the audience of his political

agenda to stay in power.

Keywords: discourse manipulation; ideology; political discourse analysis; positive-self and

negative other strategies; repetition; stance

Introduction

In the view of Van Dijk, “political discourse is the discourse of politicians” (2002:

20), “to which political actors put their words (Chiluwa, 2015: 216). Political

discourse, says Nartey (2018), has emerged as a significant field of discourse

studies during the last 30 years. Many researchers have explored different aspects

of political discourse e.g. political discourse in general (Fairclough & Fairclough,

2013; Geis, 1987; Wilson, 1990), ideology and power (Fairclough, 2001; Van

Dijk, 1998), evasion (Clayman, 2001; Friedman, 2017), categorization (Edwards,

2004; Luedar, Marsland, & Nekvapil, 2004), military, war, politics and political

discourse (Achugar, 2004; Hodges, 2013), politics and media (Bednarek, 2005;

Ciaglia, 2013), terrorism and discourse (Bhatia, 2008, 2009; Chiluwa, 2015),

metaphor and political discourse (Charteris-Black, 2011; Lakoff, 2004).

Political discourse “is not a straightforward enterprise” (Van Dijk, 2002: 20).

Rather, it is considered one of the complex text genres. The complexity of political

texts and nonlinguistic social factors as power and ideology are interrelated. The

preferred words and structure of sentences are not chosen arbitrarily but politicians

pick it decisively, particularly if the speech is delivered at a critical time

(Schaffner, 1997). Political discourse, adds Chiluwa, is multidimensional in nature

and offers an interesting area for research on resistance discourse based on such a

political language as functions to highlight conflicts, group relations, and

resistances (2015). Political discourse utilizes emotional, incomprehensible and

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

40

persuasive language (Chilton, 2008 cited in Khdair, 2016) which aims to deliver a

specific agenda which is mostly far from truth by hiding the real meaning (Van

Dijk, 1998).

Ideology is considered as the hidden part of the political discourse (Van Dijk,

2008). Therefore, this research focuses on ‘ideology’. In fact, politicians make use

of indirect language to convey their ideologies to the public. Therefore, studying

"repetition" is a powerful way to discover the structure of hidden ideology

(Khdair, 2016). Repetition means the repeating of a word with a changed or

exactly the same form (Johnstone, 1994). In its nature, repetition is a pervasive,

fundamental, infinitely useful language strategy (Tannen, 1987) which according

to Reynolds (1995: 185) presents “multiple instances of an idea or word, and the

greater the number of repetitions the more we notice it”. Reynolds further adds

saying that repetition is the “quantity of occurrences” which is utilized to

emphasize meaning and attract attention. Some of the functions of repetition

include: to give different meanings, to answer a question, to emphasize something

supposed to be difficult for the audience (Carel, 2006), for coherence and

interpersonal involvement in discourse (Tannen, 1987), for informational value

i.e. it provides a framework to interpret what is new (Hoey, 1991), emotional and

persuasive effect on audience (Johnstone, 1994), talking strategy (Fischer, 1994),

emphasis and strong effect on different ideas (Dillon, 1995), emphasis on meaning

(Reischild, 2006), persuasive strategy (Suchan, 2010), Repetition has various form

e.g. lexical, and structural repetition (see Johnstone, 1994). However, this study

focuses on lexical form of repetition which helps create lexical cohesion

(Halliday, 1994) which can help further follow the meaning (Halliday & Hasan,

1976).

Politicians use repetition as a rhetorical and manipulative tool to deceive the

audience. In fact, politicians play with language and use it to achieve their

political ends (Khalil, Islam, Chattha & Kazalbash, 2017; Khdair, 2016;

Najarzadegan, Dabaghi & Eslami-Rasekh, 2017; Post, 2009) i.e. to gain political

benefits, firmly control the public against their political interests or turn the people

into the vibrant citizens (Aschale, 2013). Rhetorical aspect provides sufficient

space to the politicians within the linguistic system to hide their intentions.

Moreover, they indirectly use the language to influence the political thoughts of

the public. Manipulation is the key idea attributed to the political language which

reflects the behavioural as well as ideological thinking of the politicians by which

they convince their audience to achieve the ends (Wilson, 1990). Chilton adds

saying that political language, being rich in the use of figurative devices, serves an

intentional role at the hands of the politicians (2008) who use it to express their

ideologies (Van Dijk, 1998). Ideologies are further utilized by the politicians to

compare as well as compete themselves with other politicians. For this purpose,

they use selected sentence structures or words to convey their ideologies.

The critical discourse analysis approach helps unite the "repetition" with

"ideology". Identifying "repetition" reveals the ideologies of politicians. This

research aims to reveal the ideology of Nawaz Sharif, by analyzing the repetition

in his political speeches of different times. It also tries to explore the selfishness of

Nawaz Sharif behind his changed political discourse by investigating the use of

‘us vs. them’ strategy in his speeches. Because in almost every political activity

there is the opposition camp (‘them’), as well as that of the allies (‘us’), which

results from politics being concerned with a struggle for power and dominance

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation Device in the Speeches of

a Pakistani Prime Minister

41

(Wirth-Koliba, 2016). Political actors try to win public support using us versus

them discourse (Barr, 2009).

Objectives of the Study

The objective of this research is to connect repetition, as a rhetorical device, to the

ideology of the politicians, and through this study aims to:

1. Explore the ways politicians utilize repetition as a rhetorical device

to achieve ideological as well as political ends; and

2. Explore the changes in the stance of politicians over the period of

time.

Research Questions

1. Is there any change in the political stance of Nawaz Sharif over the period

of time?

2. Whether the change in Nawaz Sarif’s political discourse is due to his

varying ideology or it symbolizes self-interest?

3. What does the ‘new’ intended ideology of Nawaz Sharif illustrate?

Research Methodology

This is a qualitative research based on the analysis of the political speeches in the

light of CDA’s analytical method based on Van Dijk’s (1997) socio-cognitive

theory of political discourse analysis and discourse historical approach (DHA) by

Resigil and Wodak (2007). The data for this research consists of the speeches by

Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif Ex. Prime Minister of Pakistan, which have been

downloaded from youtube and the website of Prime Minister of the Islamic

Republic of Pakistan. The required discourse from speeches has been transcribed

for detailed analysis. The speeches available in Urdu have not been translated into

English due to maintaining the originality of message. The data for this research

has been collected through convenient sampling. That is because the interest of

this research is to analyze the speeches of Nawaz Sharif to observe the cause of

change in his political stance, thus the convenient sampling technique is quite

relevant. Additionally, this research deals with ‘ideology’ which is the concealed

part of each political discourse (Van Dijk, 2008). The politicians always try to

manipulate language to hide their intended ideologies. If we differentiate

theoretically, unlike semantic, syntactic and stylistic structures, the rhetoric

operations are generally optional i.e. their presence usually has persuasive function

which is significant in political discourse. It is not unexpected therefore that the

analysis of political communication was frequently reduced to the study of

'political rhetoric' (among a large number of studies, (see Billig, 2003; Campbell &

Jamieson, 1990; 1991; Tetlock, 1993; Windt & Ingold, 1987 quoted by Van Dijk,

1997). Therefore, to find out the hidden ideology behind the change in the political

discourse of Nawaz Sharif this study utilizes rhetorical device ‘repetition’.

Observations and Interpretations

Below given tables show the repetition of text about certain issues discussed by

Nawaz Sharif’s in his political speeches. Repetition is a term which is defined as

“the recurrence of words and collocation of words in the same discourse” (Tennen,

2007: 2). Depending on the given discourse genre, repetition performs particular

functions. The political speech is one of the genres that rely heavily on repetition

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

42

(Boychev, 2003). Politicians believe in its function of confirmation and strong

persuasive effect, so they use this strategy for ideological and functional reasons

(Khdair, 2016). Repetition operates at the level of sound, sentence and meaning. It

is the most common rhetorical device used by political personalities to emphasize

certain ideas, gain attention of the audience and to have active response of

addressees for their own benefits (Van Dijk, 1997).

Table 1.1: Statements about establishing a commission for the investigation of

Panama Leaks Frequency Context

01 April 05,2016 addressed as Prime Minister (PM) of Pakistan on television

01 April 22,2016 addressed as (PM) of Pakistan on television

01 May 16,2016 addressed as PM in National Assembly of Pakistan

Background

“The leak of 11 million documents held by the Panama-based law firm Mossack

Fonseca identified links between many political and business leaders around the

world and offshore companies and accounts. Among them was the Pakistani prime

minister's family” (Panama Papers: Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif to face

investigators, 2017).

The month of April, 2016 proved upsetting for the Sharif family because the leaks

revealed that three children of Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif owned offshore

companies and assets which were not shown in their wealth statement. These

companies had been used to channel funds to obtain foreign benefits. The

insinuation that the companies aimed to hide or launder illegal wealth or avoiding

taxes challenged his credentials. Although the name of Nawaz Sharif was not

mentioned in it yet the criticism questioned his reputation. Mr. Sharif and his

family denied about their unlawful activity. In November, they told the Supreme

Court that their London property had been purchased through investments in

companies owned by the dominant family of Qatar (Panama Papers: Pakistan PM

Nawaz Sharif to face investigators, 2017).

Analysis

After Panama Leaks, PM Pakistan Nawaz Sharif kept on claiming his

incorruptibility. He stressed upon establishing a commission in his speeches after

Panama issue, for the investigation against his family and himself. Table 1.1 shows

the repetition of his statements where he ordered to set up a commission to prove

his honesty. The following chunks are taken from different speeches of Nawaz

Sharif,to support the figures of table 1.1:

“Me ne ek jamhuri mulk ke wazir-e-azam honay ki zimadari nibhatay

huay ek azad aur ghair janibdar commission bnanay ka ilaan kiya”

(2017, April 22).

“Me ne opposition ke kisi bhi mutalbay se pehlay qom se khitab kiya or

Supreme court ke judge sahiban ki sarbrahi mein ek commission ke

qayam ka ilaan kar diya” (2017, May 16).

This repetition reinforces the viewpoint that Nawaz Sharif is not guilty in this case

so he is not afraid of any investigation or the step taken against him and that is

why he is in favor of setting up a commission. Apart from the grammatical

function of repetition, which has been completely studied, repetition can have a

convincing impact on the public (Mazraani 1993: 265-267; Johnstone 1994: 6).

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation Device in the Speeches of

a Pakistani Prime Minister

43

For Tannen, repetition is "fundamental, pervasive and infinitely useful linguistic

strategy "(1989: 44). Other intention behind this repetition could be the

manifestation that being a democratic prime minister he is fulfilling his duty of

providing equal justice for everyone by presenting his family and himself for

investigation.

Table 1.2: Downbeat response of Nawaz Sharif after the decision of

disqualification (on 20th April 2017) as Prime Minister of Pakistan Phrase Frequency Context

Mujhy kun nikala? 02 Aug 10,2017 at Rawalpindi

11 Aug 10,2017 at Jehlum

03 Aug 11,2017 at Gujrat

05 Aug 11,2017 at Gujranwala

01 Aug 13,2017

01 Feb 04,2018 at Peshawar

Table 1.3: Nawaz Sharif’s anti-judiciary speeches after disqualification as PM

Frequency Context

01 July 29,2017 address to Parlimani Party

01 Aug 10,2017

01 Aug 12,2017 political gathering at Lahore

01 Jan 01,2018 political gathering at Haripur

01 Jan 09,2018 spoke to lawyers across the country

Background

The commission established under the directions of PM Nawaz Sharif,

investigated around one year. In the light of the reports presented by that

commission, five judges of Supreme Court of Pakistan unanimously disqualified

Nawaz Sharif as Prime Minister of Pakistan (Bhatti, 2017). Mr. Justice Ejaz Afzal

Khan said in court “Having furnished a false declaration under solvent

information, Mian Nawaz Sharif is not honest. He is no more eligible to be an

honest member of the parliament and he ceases to be holding the office of prime

minister" (Ray, 2017).

It was right after the decision that the members of Pakistan Muslim League

(Nawaz), started attacking democracy and the impartiality of courts for providing

justice in Pakistan. They seem to believe that democracy can sustain only with

Nawaz Sharif and without him the democracy in Pakistan is in danger.

Analysis

Table 1.2 depicts the frequency and context of repetition of the phrase ‘mujhay

kyun nikala?’ by Nawaz Sharif, after the decision of Panama verdict where he was

disqualified as a Prime Minister (PM) of Pakistan. This phrase was repeated about

21 times in the GT road rally (headed by Nawaz sharif after the decision of

disqualification by the court, from Islamabad to back to his house in Lahore). Due

to so much repetition ‘mujhay kyun nikala’ has become a base of many comical

videos and songs in the digital world. The repetition of this phrase shows that he

was not ready to accept the decision against him. So he criticized the judiciary

system of Pakistan. By repeating the same phrase at different temporal and spatial

situations, he tried to gain the sympathy and support of people for him. Wilson

(1990) states, most linguistic analytical approaches have revealed the use of

certain language by politicians to present their politicians arguments to their

audience. Politicians benefit from the use of language system as a manipulative

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

44

means to achieve certain political objectives. Therefore, ideological means are

hidden behind the language used. Although the decision of his ineligibility as PM

did not affect democracy in Pakistan at all, yet he kept on claiming in his speeches

that because of his disqualification the progress, the politics and the democracy in

the country is at risk.

In table 1.3 the frequency and context of anti-judiciary speeches of

Nawaz Sharif is mentioned. The following chunks of the speeches of Nawaz

Sharif, after decision of Panama issue, provide sound basis to accept that there is

an obvious change in the ideology of Nawaz Sharif with time.

1a. mein ne apnay interview mein pehli dafa kaha tha keh Yousaf Raza

Gillani aik saza yafta Wazir-e-Azam hy. Is ko ab ohda chor dena chahiye.

Is ko ghar chalay jana chahiye. Meri wo baat sach sabit hui, hum

surkhuru huay jab kal supreme court ne faisal kiya keh Yousaf Raza

Gillani 26 April se farig tha (2012).

1b. ap ke wazir-e-azmon ke sath yeh salook hota aya hy. 2013 mein ap

ne mujhy vote diya. Lekin awam ke vote ki koi qadar nahi. Ap vote detay

hain or 5, sirf 5 log wazir-e-azam ko ghar bhej detay hain. Kia saray k

saray wazir-e-azam jo 70 salon mein aye hein wo galat thay (12 August

2017, Jalsa at Lahore).

In 1a Nawaz Sharif has described his views about Yousaf Raza Gillani (a former

Prime Minister of PPP), who was alleged for corruption and was disqualified by

the court. Nawaz Sharif suggested him to go home. He appreciated the decision of

court regarding this matter. But when Nawaz Sharif has to face the same situation

himself after Panama Leaks’ decision, he is not ready to accept the decision of the

same court. 1b clearly shows his ideology of attacking on judiciary for the

injustice which he thinks has been done with him. He criticized the same

legislation of Pakistan indirectly which he praised for disqualifying Yousaf Raza

Gillani in 2012. Here he wants to gain sympathy of Pakistanis for him by

presenting himself an innocent and positive, telling the people that their vote has

no importance because their elected leaders are not treated as they should be. He

stated 1b to claim that he was terminated because of the political tradition in

Pakistani political scenario, where the period of dictatorship is longer than

democratic one, not because of his deeds. By using vague expression of five

people, he is actually criticizing those five judges who went against him. These

statements clearly show the selfish behavior of Nawaz Sharif as he values the

decision for another Prime Minister but is not ready to accept the same for himself.

Another text from Nawaz Sharif’s is given below to strengthen the outcomes of

this research.

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation Device in the Speeches of

a Pakistani Prime Minister

45

The above stances are taken from Nawaz Sharifs speech on television on April 22,

2016.

ap ke wazir-e-azmon k sath ye salook hota aya hy. 2013 mein ap ne mujhy vote

diya. Lekin awam ke vote ki koi qadar nahi. Ap vote detay hain or 5 sirf 5 log

wazir-e-azam ko ghar bhej detay hain. Kia saray ke saray wazir-e-azam jo 70

salon mein aye han wo galat thay (12 August 2017 at Lahore).

The above given expressions illustrate a change in Nawaz Sharif’s political

discourse. Two paragraphs are taken from the speech before the decision of court

about Panama Leaks and the third one is taken from the speech after decision.

Before decision he used positive expressions about the legislation of Pakistan and

its courts by saying that ‘I will accept whatever decision is taken by them’ but after

the decision, his statement is given in third paragraph where he indirectly hits the

same law and judges by saying ‘5 log aur chand log wazir-e-azam ko ghar bhej

detay hain’. Though there is change in the political discourse of Nawaz Sharif but

it seems to be due to personal benefits not for the good of nation.

Table 1.4: Nawaz Sharif’s views about Pakistan Army Sr.No Statements Context

1 hum sab yahan Shaheed Genral Zia-ul-Haq ko khiraj-e-aqidat paish krnay ke liye aye hain. Allah General Zia-ul-Haq Shaheed ko karwat

karwat jannat naseeb karay

Aug 1996, Islamabad

2 Ye log shaheed Zia-ul-Haq ka muqabla krain gy. Yeh log, ye Pakistan ke gaddar jo apnay baap ko shaheed kehti hain, jis ne Pakistan k 2

tukray kiye huay hain or Shaheed General Zia-ul-Haq surkhuru ho ker

rahay ga.

3 Hum ne apna pait kaat kr jis foj (army) ko pala hy. jo foj ko helicopter, topain aur bandoqain le ker di hain, aj wohi topain aur

bandoqain Pakistaniyon ka khoon ker rahi hain.

4 Khas taur per wo tola jinhon ne Marshal law lgaya hy, unhon ne ehtram sikha nahi ain (law) ka. Unhon ne Jamhuri Wazir-e-Azam ka

dil se ehtram nahi kiya. Aisay bhi hotay dekha hy me ne keh jab

Wazir-e-Azam GHQ mein jaye to yeh shayad cap bhi is liye nahi pehntay k Wazir-e-Azam ko salute na krna paray

2007 (Interview on

ARY News)

5 70 salon (years) se is mulk mein ye mazaq hota ayah hy. Ap vote de k

wazie-e-azam bnatay hain, koi dictator aa ke ap ke vote ki parchi ko

phaar ke ap ke hath mein pakra deta hy. hy koi esi adalat jo dictator ko saza de

Aug 10,2017 at

Jehlum

6 on average 1 wazir-e-azam ko 1.1/5 saal hakomat mili hy, 30 saal 3

dictator is mulk ko kha gaye

Aug 12,2017 at

Lahore

Background

Army is considered a well-built institute in Pakistan. The Pakistani army has been

at the center of politics and the state since 1947. It has ruled directly for 34 years

and, in the rest, has indirectly dominated the state and society. Nawaz Sharif, who

became prime minister in 1990-93 and in 1997-99, actually tried to assert his

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

46

constitutional abilities towards the army. The clashes of Nawaz Sharif with the

COAS (Chief of Army Staff) have not ended here. The COAS, General Pervez

Musharraf, with whom Prime Minister Sharif had serious political and personal

differences, was replaced by General Ziauddin. This move proved expensive to

Sharif. Regarding the matters of Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, there were

differences between army and Nawaz Sharif (Hussain, 2017). When Nawaz Sharif

took office in June 2013, it was clear what kind of civil-military relations he

wanted. A month before taking power, Sharif told Indian journalist Karan Tahapar

in an interview with CNN IBN's Devil's Advocate that the army is a federal

government department and the military chief of staff works under the federal

government and implements federal government policies. “All I know is when I

was prime minister the policies were being formulated by the federal government,

by the civilian head of the state and then of course executed by the institutions”

(Ahmad, 2016).

Analysis

Table 1.4 shows the viewpoint of Nawaz Sharif about Pak army, which he

discussed at different temporal and spatial contexts. First two excerpts in table 1.4

show his positive attitude towards army as he praised an army officer Genral Zia-

ul-Haq who also ruled over Pakistan. While Sharif’s statements about army after

1999, depict a change in his ideology which is against army. Excerpts from

Sharif’s political discourse at no. 3, 4, 5, 6 (table 1.4) show his strong

disagreement with the actions of Pak army.

1. Positive self-representation and negative-other representation (us vs.

them)

Positive self-presentation and negative other-presentation are two paired strategies

used by politicians in their political discourse ( Dijk, 1993). According to Van Dijk

(2006) the strategy of positive self-presentation and other negative representation,

is very typical in this partial account of the facts in favour of the interests of the

speaker or writer, while blaming negative situations and events on opponents or on

others (immigrants, terrorists, young people, etc.). This strategy can be applied to

the structures of many levels of speech in the usual way. It is used to show up the

positive intentions and doing of the speaker/writer by highlighting the actions of

the opponents in a negative way.

Table 2.1: Discourse of Nawaz sharif’s speeches representing ‘us vs. them’

(strategy of positive-self representation and negative-other representation) Sr.No About ‘Us’ About Them’

1 The gravity of the situation demanded that

instead of making speeches, I must deeply

analyse the wounds inflicted on Pakistan and explore the ways and means to heal

them. Not a single moment has passed in

the last two and a half months that I have not reflected on how to meet the present

challenges. (Aug 19,2013)

During the last 14 years, worst governance,

widespread corruption, incompetence,

nepotism and wrong policies have shattered the very foundations of the country.

(Aug 19,2013)

2 mein Pakistan ki khidmat k jazbay se aya

tha aur Swat ke awm ne mujhay apnay kandhon apnay sar per bithaya tha. Aur

Swat ke awam ka josh-o-jazba dekh ker

meray dil ne ye kaha ke Nawaz Sharif tu ne Swat ki awam ki wo khidmat ki hy jis

ki tarikh mein koi missal nahi milti

(May 20,2016 at Swat)

O naya Pakistan bnanay walay ladlay tum ne

hmesha galiyon ki syasat ki hy. Suno ye khalq-e-khuda tumharay baray mein kia rai

rakhti hy

(May 20,2016 at Swat)

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation Device in the Speeches of

a Pakistani Prime Minister

47

3 Hum sab ke sath mil ker kaam krnay ko tyar hain (Sep 07, 2016 at Chitral).

agr koi tauwan nahi krna chahta to us ki mrzi (Sep 07, 2016 at Chitral)

4 pichlay 3 salon ke nataij aaj nazr ana shuru

ho gaye hain. Agr taraqi ki yehi speed rahi

to berozgari ka hmesha ke liye khatma ho jaye ga (September 02, 2016 at Lahore).

5 Jb hum ne kaam shuru kiya to dharnay

walay maidan mein aa gaye (Aug 10,2017 at Jehlum)

Wo maulvi sahib Canada se aa gaye, bohtan

tarashi walay or maulvi sahib ikathay ho gaye. Maulvi sahib ko har 3 mahinay baad

Pakistan ka dard jagta hy. Na janay wo kon

log hain jo un k peechay lag jatay hain. (Aug 10,2017 at Jehlum)

6 on average 1 wazir-e-azam ko 1.1/5 saal

hakomat mili hy

(12 August 2017, Jalsa at Lahore)

30 saal 3 dictator is mulk ko kha gaye

(12 August 2017, Jalsa at Lahore)

7 ap k wazir-e-azmon ke sath ye salook hota

aya hy. 2013 mein ap ne mujhy vote diya.

Lekin awam ke vote ki koi qadar nahi. Ap vote detay hain or 5 sirf 5 log wazir-e-

azam ko ghar bhej detay hain. Kia saray ke

saray wazir-e-azam jo 70 salon mein aye han wo galat thay.

(12 August 2017, Jalsa at Lahore)

mein ne apnay interview mein pehli dafa

kaha tha keh Yousaf Raza Gillani aik saza

yafta Wazir-e-Azam hy. Is ko ab ohda chor dena chahiye. Is ko ghar chalay jana chahiye.

Meri wo baat sach sabit hui, hum surkhuru

huay jab kal supreme court ne faisal kiya keh Yousaf Raza Gillani 26 April se farig tha

(2012).

8 Balochistan mein pichlay 4 salon se jo tarqi ho rahi hy iski missal nahi milti.

(Dec 02, 2017 at Quetta)

4 saal pehlay ka manzir yaad hy apko Balochistan k andar kuch bhi nahi hota tha,

koi taraqi k aasar nahi thay. Aaj Balochistan

mein taraqi missali hy (December 02, 2017 at Quetta).

In all the above stances which were produced at different places and in different

times but the context was same i.e. of a political event. He talked about the

progress (table 2.1: No 1, 4, 8 statements) made under his government since 2013

(when he became Prime Minister for the third time). It is very encouraging that

there has been progress in his time of power but in each standpoint of his speeches,

more subjectivity is found. The analysis of political discourses has emphasized the

fact that ideological manipulations are expressed, performed, maintained and

sometimes reiterated through discursive structures. Underlying political ideologies

are typically expressed in political discourse by emphasizing our good things and

their bad things and by de- emphasizing our bad things and their good things (Van

Dijk, 2004). He discussed the advancement of his control only and presented

hidden negativity for others by using the expressions as ‘Nawaz Sharif tu ne Swat

ki awam ki wo khidmat ki hy jis ki tarikh mein koi missal nahi milti, pichlay 3

salon k ntaij aaj nazr ana shuru ho gai hain, pehli martaba pichlay 70 salon mein,

mein university bnanay ka ilan ker raha hon and pichlay 4 salon se’. In all these

expressions, taken from different speeches at different temporal and spatial

situations, he is focusing his achievements only in a positive way without

mentioning the facts and figures to authenticate his claims.

Discussion

The first question of the study has been raised to know: “Is there any change in the

political stance of Mr. Sharif over the period of time? The answer to this question,

as is evident from tables 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4, is yes. The results indicate a marked

change in the stance of Mr. Sharif over the period of time as is clear from his

statements about the law process of Pakistan, before and after the decision of

Panama issue. His stance about democracy also changed with time when he

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

48

praised the decision of court in 2012 against former PM Yousaf Raza Gillani but

condemned forcefully the same decision against himself in 2017. Other examples

of change in the stance of the said politician include: (a) his view about General

Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq and General Pervez Musharraf i.e. he praises the former

and criticizes the later. The reason for his praise and criticism is that General

Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq benefits him but General Pervez Musharraf does not; and

(b) his claim to accept the decision by the court on the findings of the commission

on Panama issue which he not only refuses to accept but also criticizes publically

for going against him.

To answer the second and third questions of the study i.e. whether the change in

Nawaz Sharif’s political discourse is due to his varying ideology or it symbolizes

self-interest, and what does the ‘new’ intended ideology of Nawaz Sharif illustrate,

it can be said, in the light of the observations that the change in his stance is

caused by his personal benefits only i.e. his ‘new’ ideology persuaded his audience

to believe that without him the democracy and the progress in Pakistan is

endangered. Though, still the government is functioning under the new democratic

Prime Minister Mr. Shahid Khaqan Abbasi. The context behind his changed

viewpoint about Pak army also reflects his self-centeredness. He kept on

criticizing the army as a danger for democracy after the end of his rule in 1999.

Similarly, through recurring expressions in different contexts like:

mujhy kun nikala?, Ap vote de ke wazie-e-

azam bnatay hain,koi dictator aa ke ap ke vote

ki parchi ko phaar ke ap ke hath mein pakr

deta hy. 30 saal 3 dictator is mulk ko kha gai.

ap ke wazir-e-azmon ke sath ye salook hota

aya hy. 2013 mein ap ne mujhy vote diya.

Lekin awam ke vote ki koi qadar nahi. Ap vote

detay hain or 5 sirf 5 log wazir-e-azam ko ghar

bhej detay hain,

Mr. Sharif tries to make his audience believe (in the context where democracy is

still practiced in the country) that Nawaz Sharif and his family is a victim of

injustice by the law of Pakistan and army is the only institution which is a threat to

democracy. Sharif’s new’ ideology actually tries to persuade people in opposition

to judiciary and army by manipulating the decision of disqualification against him

as an insult of the vote of the people of Pakistan. As Rozina and Karapetjana

(2009) state that linguistic manipulation can also be considered as an influential

instrument of political rhetoric because political discourse is primarily focused on

persuading people to take specified political actions or to make crucial political

decisions. The whole scenario of the change in political discourse of Nawaz Sharif

clearly presents self-interest because Sharif changed his statements where he

expects to lose power and where his own stakes are at risk.

Change in the stance is not seen as a good thing. For, in the view of Kreps, Laurin

and Merritt (2017) the leaders who change their stance are not brave, courageous,

worthy of support, and are no more effective. Rather, they appear to be hypocrites.

An implication of changing the key stance, adds Fradera, can put a person at odds

alongwith his family and friends. They may be seized by enemies who may dub

him as a commitment breaker, unauthentic and dishonest person (2018). This is

cent percent true about Nawaz Sharif. Not only he himself, but also the whole of

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation Device in the Speeches of

a Pakistani Prime Minister

49

his family and a large number of friends are not only seized by the political rivals

but they are facing the law for different charges i.e. the children of Nawaz Sharif

and his brother Shahbaz Sharif and their in-laws are being investigated for off-

shore companies (Cheema, 2016), his daughter Maryan Nawaz Sharif is facing

severe charges. She, alongwith her husband Safdar Awan, has also been jailed.

Nawaz Sharif himself has been declared dishonest, fined, disqualified for public

office, and jailed (BBC News, 2018; Haider & Dilawar, 2018; Sayeed & Hassan,

2018). So a leader should keep his stance stable (Kreps, Laurin & Merritt, 2017;

Fradera, 2018).

Discourse, in its sense, is a strategy which people utilize to convey their

ideas or thoughts in non-verbal or verbal modes of communication (Sobur, 2006).

Experts, in the field of critical discourse analysis (see Fairclough & Wodak, 1997),

consider discourse as a social practice and is, in the view of Rogers, concerned

with the study of the relationship between language and society (2004). Similarly,

ideology is considered the core of critical discourse analysis. For according to Van

Dijk “people acquire, express and reproduce their ideologies by text and talk”

(2006, p. 115) and ideological discourse analysis, being a type of socio-political

analysis of discourse (Van Dijk, 1995) reflects the purpose of discourse analysis

(Gadalla, 2012), which embeds discourse strategies in cultural, political, and social

contexts (Van Dijk, 1995).

Ideological discourse is structured by negative-other (derogation) and

positive-self (boasting) representation strategy (Van Dijk, 2006). This strategy of

positive-self and negative-other representations has a simple evaluative structure

i.e. ideological square (Van Dijk, 1998, p. 33) which works in a way that the

““outgroups, enemies or opponents are described in negative terms” (Van Dijk,

1995, p. 143) and “our good things are emphasized and our bad things de-

emphasized” (Van Dijk, 2006, p. 126). When we analyze the speeches of Nawaz

Sharif, we see that he has not only been talking in negative terms about his

opponents i.e. Musharraf, army, Imran Khan, Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri and the judges of

supreme court of Pakistan but also he has been emphasizing to highlight his good

things i.e. his measures to ensure progress in Baluchistan and Khyber Pakhtun

Khwah (KPK) etc.

Discourse is considered as subjective representation of the world (see

Fairclough, 1995; Mcleod & Hertog 1992; Van Dijk 1988, 1995) and politicians

use it to represent different events in such a way as may suit to their ideologies

(Al-Faki, 2014). In the view of Wilson (2001 cited in Al-Faki, 2014) politicians

use discourse to create negative or positive effects. Same is true about Nawaz

Sharif. The analysis of his speeches shows that he has been using discourse to

create a positive image of himself and negative image of his rivals. Moreover,

Wilson adds that “We not only use language to shape reality, but we use it also to

defend that reality, against anyone whose alternative values might threaten ours”

(2001: 34). This is again true about the ideology of Mr. Sharif. He has been trying

to shape and defend the realities by talking about himself in positive terms and

about others in negative terms. He has also been trying to defend the charges

leveled against himself. For this purpose, he has been observed to blame others i.e.

army, judiciary, and his political rivals (i.e. Imran Khan, and Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri).

In this way, his politics emerges as about which, according to Chilton (2004), is "a

struggle for power, between those who seek to assert and maintain their power and

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

50

those who seek to resist it" (p. 3) and Mr. Sharif appears to be the member of

executive politics which, in the view of Hansson, “is characterised by blame

games –offensive and defensive symbolic performances (2017: 1).

Conclusion This research has analyzed the linguistic structure of various speeches of Nawaz

Sharif to unveil the hidden ideology behind. The analysis of different speeches of

various temporal and spatial situations proves the selfish behavior of Nawaz Sharif

in his political journey, which is assured by the repetition of lexical items or

sentences and by presenting his own actions positive while giving negative impact

of other politicians or institutions of Pakistan. It also shows that the change in his

political discourse is not for the benefit of Pakistani people but for himself. This

work depicts that how linguistic strategies as repetition and use of us vs. them, are

employed by politicians to influence the public for the execution of their political

agendas.

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation Device in the Speeches of

a Pakistani Prime Minister

51

References

[1] Achugar, M. (2004). The events and actors of 11 September 2001 as seen

from Uruguay:

[2] Analysis of daily newspaper editorials. Discourse & Society, 15(2-3), 291–

320.

[3] Ahmad, A. (2016, May 07). Nawaz Sharif and the army. Pakistan Today.

Retrieved from https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2016/05/07/nawaz-

sharif-and-the-army/

[4] Al-Faki, I. M. (2014). Political speeches of some African leaders from

linguistic perspective (1981-2013). International Journal of Humanities and

Social Science, 4(3), 180-198.

[5] Aschale, A. (2013). A critical discourse analysis of Barack Obama’s

speeches vis-A-vis Middle East and North Africa (Ph. D. thesis). Addis

Ababa University, Addis Abada.

[6] Barr, R. R. (2009). Populists, outsiders and anti-establishment politics.

Party Politics, 15(1), 29-48.

[7] BBC News (2018, July 6). Pakistan ex-PM Nawaz Sharif given 10-year jail

term. Retrieved on August 28, 2019 from

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44737793

[8] Bednarek, M. (2005). Frame revisited – the coherence-inducing function of

frames. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 685–705.

[9] Bhatia, A. (2008). Discursive illusions in the American national strategy for

combating terrorism. Journal of Language and Politics, 7(2), 201–227

[10] Bhatia, A. (2009). The discourses of terrorism. Journal of Pragmatics,

41(2), 279-289.

[11] Bhatti, H. (2017, July 28). Nawaz Sharif steps down as PM after SC's

disqualification verdict.

[12] Dawn, Retrieved from https://www.dawn.com/news/1348191

[13] Billig, M. (2003). Critical discourse analysis and the rhetoric of critique.

London & New York: SAGE Publication.

[14] Boychev, B. (2003). Along the limits of communicativity. VFU: Varna.

[15] Callow, K. (1974). Discourse considerations in translating the Word of

God. USA: Zondervan Publishing House.

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

52

[16] Campbell, K. K., & Jamieson, K. H. 1990. Deeds done in words:

presidential rhetoric and the genres of governance. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.

[17] Carel, H. (2006). Life and death in Freud and Heidegger (Vol. 6). Oxford:

Rodopi.

[18] Charteris-Black, J. (2011). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power

of metaphor. London: Palgrave MacMillan.

[19] Cheema, U. (2016, April 6). The Panama papers: Pages from Pakistan.

Retrieved on August 29, 2019 from

https://web.archive.org/web/20160406024911/http://cirp.pk/index.php/2016

/04/04/the-panama-papers-pages-from-pakistan/

[20] Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice.

London: Routledge.

[21] Chiluwa, I. (2015). Radicalist discourse: A study of the stances of Nigeria's

Boko Haram and Somalia's Al Shabaab on Twitter. Journal of Multicultural

Discourses, 10(2), 214-235.

[22] Ciaglia, A. (2013). Politics in the media and the media in politics: A

comparative study of the relation- ship between the media and political

systems in three European countries. European Journal of Communication,

28(5), 541–555.

[23] Clayman, S. E. (2001). Answers and evasions. Language in Society, 30(3),

403–442.

[24] David, M. K. (2018). Language, Power and Manipulation: The Use of

Rhetoric in Maintaining. International Conference on Language and

Education , 1-6. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322386004

[25] Dillon, M. C. (1995). Semilogical reductionism. New York: State

University of New York Press.

[26] Edwards, J. (2004). After the fall. Discourse & Society, 15(2-3), 155–184.

[27] Fairclough, N. L. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: Papers in the critical

study of language. London: Longman.

[28] Fairclough, N. L., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In Van

Dijk TA (ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction (pp. 258–284). London:

Sage.

[29] Fairclough, N. L. (2001). Language and power (2nd ed.). Essex: Pearson

Education.

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation Device in the Speeches of

a Pakistani Prime Minister

53

[30] Fairclough, I., & Fairclough, N. L. (2013). Political discourse analysis: A

method for advanced students. London: Routledge.

[31] Fischer, A. (1994). Repetition (Vol. 7). Gunter Narr Verlag.

[32] Fradera, A. (2018). Political and business leaders who change their moral

stance are perceived not as brave, but hypocritical and ineffective.

Retrieved on August 29, 2019 from

https://digest.bps.org.uk/2018/07/31/political-and-business-leaders-who-

change-their-moral-stance-are-perceived-not-as-brave-but-hypocritical-and-

ineffective/

[33] Friedman, E. (2017). Evasion strategies in international documents: When

‘constructive ambiguity’ leads to oppositional interpretation. Critical

Discourse Studies, 14(4), 385–401.

[34] Gadalla, H. A. (2012). Ideological strategies in Barack Obama’s Cairo

speech: A critical discourse analysis. Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts, 41, 9-

45.

[35] Geis, M. L. (1987). The language of politics. New York: Springer-Verlag.

[36] Haider, K., & Dilawar, I. (2018, April, 13). Pakistan court orders lifetime

political ban against Sharif. Bloomberg. Retrieved on August 30, 2019 from

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-13/pakistan-court-

orders-lifetime-political-ban-against-sharif

[37] Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London:

Longman.

[38] Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). Introduction to functional grammar. London:

Edward Arnold.

[39] Hodges, A. (2013). Discourses of war and peace. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

[40] Hoey, M . (1991). Patterns of lexis in text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[41] Hussain, E. (2017, July 22). Nawaz Sharif versus the army. Daily Times.

Retrieved from https://dailytimes.com.pk/959/nawaz-sharif-versus-the-

army/

[42] Johnstone, B. (1991). Repetition in Arabic discourse: Paradigms, syntagms,

and the ecology of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

[43] Johnstone, B. (1994). Repetition in discourse: Interdisciplinary

perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

54

[44] Khalil, U., Islam, M., Chattha, S. A., & Qazalbash, F. (2017). Persuasion

and political discourse: A critical discourse analysis of Imran Khan’s

election speech (2013). Pakistan Vision, 18(2), 193-210.

[45] Khdair, S. J. (2016). Repetition as a rhetorical device in the political

speeches of three Egyptian presidents: Mubarak, Morsi and Al-Sisi a

comparative translation study (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from

https://repository.najah.edu/bitstream/handle/20.500.11888/6556/Sujud%20

Khudeir%20%281%29.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

[46] Kreps, T. A., Laurin, K., & Merritt, A. C. (2017). Hypocritical flip-flop, or

courageous evolution? When leaders change their moral minds. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 113(5), 730-752.

[47] Lahlali, E. M. (2012). Repetition and ideology in Nasrallah’s political

speeches. Arab Media & Society, 15, 1-13.

[48] Lakoff, G.(2004). Don’t think an elephant. Know your values and frame the

debate. The essential guide for progressiveness. White River Junction. VT:

Chelsea Green.

[49] Luedar, I., Marsland, V., & Nekvapil, J. (2004). On membership

categorization: ‘Us’, ‘them’ and ‘doing violence’ in political discourse.

Discourse & Society, 15(2-3), 243–266.

[50] Martín, P. A. M. (2003). Genre and discourse community. ES: Revista de

Filología Inglesa, 25, 153-166.

[51] Mazraani, N. (1993). Aspects of Language Variation in Arabic Political

Speech Making. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Cambridge.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/176304

[52] Miller, C. R., & Kelly, A. R. (2016 ). 14 discourse genres. Verbal

Communication, 3, 269-286.

[53] Najarzadegan, S., Dabaghi, A., & Eslami-Rasekh, A. (2017). A critical

discourse analysis of Iran and US presidential speeches at the UN: The

sociopragmatic functions. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(9),

764-774.

[54] Nartey, M. (2019). ‘I shall prosecute a ruthless war on these monsters…’: A

critical metaphor analysis of discourse of resistance in the rhetoric of

Kwame Nkrumah. Critical Discourse Studies, 16(2), 113-130.

[55] Nawaz Sharif sentenced to 10 years, Maryam 7 in Avenfield reference.

Retrieved on August 30, 2019 from (https://www.geo.tv/latest/201862-

nawaz-sharif-sentenced-to-10-years-maryam-7-in-avenfield-reference

Use of Repetition as a Political Discourse Manipulation Device in the Speeches of

a Pakistani Prime Minister

55

[56] Panama Papers: Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif to face investigators (2017,

April 20). Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-36092356

[57] Post, M. D. (2009). Representations of meaning within textual personas: An

analysis of 2008 US presidential campaign speeches (Master thesis). Center

for English Language Studies, University of Birmingham, UK.

[58] Ray, S. (2017, July 28). Pakistan court disqualifies Prime Minister Nawaz

Sharif over corruption allegations. The Telegraph. Retrieved from

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/28/pakistan-court-disqualifies-

prime-minister-nawaz-sharif/

[59] Reynolds, D. W. (1995). Repetition in non-native speaker writing. SSLA,

17, 185–209.

[60] Rogers, R. (2004). An introduction to critical discourse analysis in

education. New York: Routledge.

[61] Rozina, G., & Karapetjana, I. (2009). The use of language in political

rhetoric: Linguistic manipulation. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen-

Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2009(19). Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/406f/c2ff0be0e4d1aac5975a235fcfde57f25

4ee.pdf

[62] Sayeed, S., & Hassan, S. R. (2018, April 13). Pakistan bars former PM

Sharif from holding office for life. Reuters. Retrieved on August 29, 2019

from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pakistan-sharif/pakistan-bars-

former-pm-sharif-from-holding-office-for-life-idUSKBN1HK0PG

[63] Schaffner, C. (1997). Translation and norms. Clevedon & Philadelphia:

Multilingual matters LTD.

[64] Sobur, A. (2007). Media text analysis. Jakarta: Teens Rosdakarya.

[65] Suchan, J. (2010). Toward an understanding of Arabic

Persuasion.Proceedings of the 75th Annual Convention of the Association

for Business Communication. October 27-30, 2010, Chicago, Illinois.

[66] Tannen, D. (1987). Repetition in conversation as spontaneous formulaicity.

Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 7(3), 215-244.

[67] Van Dijk, T. A. (1988). Critical discourse analysis. Massachutts & Oxford:

Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

[68] Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse

& Society, 4(2), 249-283.

[69] Van Dijk, T. A. (1995). Discourse semantics and ideology. Discourse &

Society 6(2): 243-289.

Dr. Syed Kazim Shah & Muhammad Ahmad

56

[70] Van Dijk, T. A. (1997). What is political discourse analysis? 11-52.

[71] Van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage.

[72] Van Dijk, T. A. (2002). Political discourse and ideology. Anàlisi del

Discurs Polític, 15-34.

[73] Van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Discourse, context and cognition. London & New

Delhi. SAGE Publications.

[74] Van Dijk T. A. (2008). Discourse and power. Houndmills & Basingstoke:

Palgrave Macmillan.

[75] Wilson, J. (1990). Politically speaking. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

[76] Wirth-Koliba, V. (2016). The diverse and dynamic world of ‘us’ and ‘them’

in political discourse. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across

Disciplines, 8(1), 23-37.

[77] Wodak, M. R. (2017, January). The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).

Researchgate, 87-121. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251636976